Long-term oncological outcomes of local excision versus radical resection for early colorectal cancer in young patients without preoperative chemoradiotherapy: a population-based propensity matching study

Oncological outcomes of local excision versus radical surgery for early rectal cancer in the context of staging and surveillance: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Local resection (LR) methods for rectal cancer are generally considered in the palliative setting or for patients deemed a high anaesthetic risk. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to compare oncological outcomes of LR and radical resection (RR) for early rectal cancer in the context of staging and surveillance assessment.

METHODS

A literature search of MEDLINE, Embase and Emcare databases was performed for studies that reported data on clinical outcomes for both LR and RR for early rectal cancer from January 1995 to April 2023. Meta-analysis was performed using random-effect models and between-study heterogeneity was assessed. The quality of assessment was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for observational studies and the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2.0 tool for randomised controlled trials.

RESULTS

Twenty studies with 12,022 patients were included: 6,476 patients had LR and 5,546 patients underwent RR. RR led to an improvement in 5-year overall survival (OR 1.84; 95 % CI 1.54-2.20; p < 0.0001; I2 20 %) and local recurrence (OR 3.06; 95 % CI 2.02-4.64; p < 0.0001; I2 39 %) when compared to LR. However, when staging and surveillance methods were clearly adopted in LR cases, there was an improvement in R0 rates (96.7 % vs 85.6 %), 5-year disease-free survival (93.0 % vs 77.9 %) and overall survival (81.6 % vs 79.0 %) compared to when staging and surveillance was not reported/performed.

CONCLUSIONS

LR may be appropriate for selected patients without poor prognostic factors in early rectal cancer. This study also highlights that there is currently no single standardised staging or surveillance approach being adopted in the management of early rectal cancer. A more specified and standardised preoperative staging for patient selection as well as clinical and image-based surveillance protocols is needed.

Excision of malignant and pre-malignant rectal lesions by transanal endoscopic microsurgery in patients under 50 years of age

BACKGROUND

The most common technique for treating benign and early malignant rectal lesions is transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM). Local excision is an acceptable technique for high-risk and elderly patients, but there are hardly any data regarding young patients.

AIM

To describe TEM outcomes in patients under 50 years of age.

METHODS

We collected demographic, clinical, and pathological data from all patients under the age of 50 years who underwent the TEM procedure at Hasharon Rabin Medical Center from January 2005 to December 2018.

RESULTS

During the study period, a total of 26 patients under the age of 50 years underwent TEM procedures. Their mean age was 43.3 years. Eleven (42.0%) were male. The mean operative time was 67 min, and the mean tumor size was 2.39 cm, with a mean anal verge distance of 8.50 cm. No major intraoperative or postoperative complications were recorded. The median length of stay was 2 d. Seven (26.9%) lesions were adenomas with low-grade dysplasia, four (15.4%) were high-grade dysplasia adenomas, two were T1 carcinomas (7.8%), and three were T2 carcinomas (11.5%). No residual disease was found following endoscopic polypectomy in two patients (7.8%), but four (15.4%) had other pathologies. Surgical margins were negative in all cases. Local recurrence was detected in one patient 33 mo following surgery.

CONCLUSION

Among young adult patients, TEM for benign rectal lesions has excellent outcomes. It may also offer a balance between the efficacy of complete oncologic resection and postoperative quality of life in the treatment of rectal cancer. In some cases, it may be considered an alternative to radical surgery.

DSTN Hypomethylation Promotes Radiotherapy Resistance of Rectal Cancer by Activating the Wnt/β-Catenin Signaling Pathway

PURPOSE

Although surgical resection combined with neoadjuvant radiation therapy can reduce the local recurrence rate of rectal cancer, not all patients benefit from neoadjuvant radiation therapy. Therefore, screening for patients with rectal cancer who are sensitive or resistant to radiation therapy has great clinical significance.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Patients with rectal cancer were selected according to postoperative tumor regression grade, and tumor samples were taken for detection. Differential genes between radiation-resistant and radiation-sensitive tissues were screened and validated by Illumina Infinium MethylationEPIC BeadChip, proteomics, Agena MassARRAY methylation, reverse transcription quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction, and immunohistochemistry. In vitro and in vivo functional experiments verified the role of DSTN. Protein coimmunoprecipitation, western blot, and immunofluorescence were used to investigate the mechanisms of DSTN-related radiation resistance.

RESULTS

DSTN was found to be highly expressed (P < .05) and hypomethylated (P < .01) in rectal cancer tissues resistant to neoadjuvant radiation therapy. Follow-up data confirmed that patients with high expression of DSTN in neoadjuvant radiation therapy-resistant rectal cancer tissues had shorter disease-free survival (P < .05). DSTN expression increased after methyltransferase inhibitor inhibition of DNA methylation in colorectal cancer cells (P < .05). In vitro and in vivo experiments showed that knockdown of DSTN promoted the sensitivity of colorectal cancer cells to radiation therapy, and overexpression of DSTN promoted the resistance of colorectal cancer cells to radiation (P < .05). The Wnt/β-catenin signaling pathway was activated in colorectal cancer cells overexpressing DSTN. β-catenin was highly expressed in radiation therapy-resistant tissues, and there was a linear correlation between the expression of DSTN and β-catenin (P < .0001). Further studies showed that DSTN can bind to β-catenin and increase its stability.

CONCLUSIONS

The degree of DNA methylation and the expression level of DSTN can be used as biomarkers to predict the sensitivity of neoadjuvant radiation therapy for rectal cancer. DSTN and β-catenin are also expected to become a reference for the selection of neoadjuvant radiation therapy.

Delphi Initiative for Early-Onset Colorectal Cancer (DIRECt) International Management Guidelines

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Patients with early-onset colorectal cancer (eoCRC) are managed according to guidelines that are not age-specific. A multidisciplinary international group (DIRECt), composed of 69 experts, was convened to develop the first evidence-based consensus recommendations for eoCRC.

METHODS

After reviewing the published literature, a Delphi methodology was used to draft and respond to clinically relevant questions. Each statement underwent 3 rounds of voting and reached a consensus level of agreement of ≥80%.

RESULTS

The DIRECt group produced 31 statements in 7 areas of interest: diagnosis, risk factors, genetics, pathology-oncology, endoscopy, therapy, and supportive care. There was strong consensus that all individuals younger than 50 should undergo CRC risk stratification and prompt symptom assessment. All newly diagnosed eoCRC patients should receive germline genetic testing, ideally before surgery. On the basis of current evidence, endoscopic, surgical, and oncologic treatment of eoCRC should not differ from later-onset CRC, except for individuals with pathogenic or likely pathogenic germline variants. The evidence on chemotherapy is not sufficient to recommend changes to established therapeutic protocols. Fertility preservation and sexual health are important to address in eoCRC survivors. The DIRECt group highlighted areas with knowledge gaps that should be prioritized in future research efforts, including age at first screening for the general population, use of fecal immunochemical tests, chemotherapy, endoscopic therapy, and post-treatment surveillance for eoCRC patients.

CONCLUSIONS

The DIRECt group produced the first consensus recommendations on eoCRC. All statements should be considered together with the accompanying comments and literature reviews. We highlighted areas where research should be prioritized. These guidelines represent a useful tool for clinicians caring for patients with eoCRC.

Is local excision an appropriate treatment modality in patients presenting with early-stage (cT1 N0 M0) rectal adenocarcinoma?

BACKGROUND

Prior studies evaluating the safety and efficacy of local excision relative to surgical resection in early-stage rectal adenocarcinoma have primarily included low rectal cancers treated with abdominoperineal resection as control comparison cohorts. The role of local excision in early-stage rectal adenocarcinoma is incompletely defined.

METHODS

We queried the National Cancer Database to identify patients with cT1 N0 M0 rectal adenocarcinoma between 2004 and 2019. Patients undergoing abdominoperineal resection were excluded. Multivariable regression was used to identify factors associated with use of local excision instead of low anterior resection. Patients undergoing local excision were propensity score matched for age, sex, demographic characteristics, Charlson-Deyo comorbidity class score, and tumor grade and size to those undergoing low anterior resection. Short-term clinical outcomes and 5-year overall survival for matched cohorts were compared by standard methods.

RESULTS

A total of 5,693 patients met inclusion criteria; 1,973 patients underwent local excision and 3,720 low anterior resection. Age (adjusted odds ratio 1.26; 95% confidence interval, 1.17-1.37), tumor histology (poorly differentiated histology: adjusted odds ratio 0.66; 95% confidence interval, 0.51-0.86), and size (>4 cm: adjusted odds ratio 0.20; 95% confidence interval, 0.16-0.25) were associated with choice of intervention. On comparison of matched cohorts, patients undergoing LE demonstrated shorter hospital stay (2.4 ±9.8 vs 5.6 ±8.1 days; P < .001) and lower readmission rate (4% vs 7%; P = .002) but higher margin-positive resection rates (8% vs 2%; P < .001). Overall survival profiles for patients undergoing local excision were comparable with those for low anterior resection.

CONCLUSION

In patients with cT1 N0 M0 rectal adenocarcinoma, local excision is associated with a higher margin-positive resection rate than low anterior resection but affords accelerated postprocedure recovery and comparable rates of overall survival.

Radical vs. Local Excision in Rectal Carcinoma T1N0M0: Recurrence and Mortality Rates

Local transanal excision of early rectal carcinoma is an appealing treatment because of its low morbidity rates and better functional results than radical resection. However, this treatment approach is controversial due to its association with local recurrence when compared to the latter. This review aims to compare the local recurrence and mortality rates of local vs. radical excision in patients with T1N0M0 rectal carcinoma, based on data in the literature in the last 20 years. A PubMed, Cochrane, and Google Scholar search of published literature in the last 20 years was performed. A total of 12 studies were identified. Three were prospective, one was a population-based propensity matching study, one was a nationwide cohort study, one was a meta-analysis, and the remaining studies were retrospective/observational. The mean local recurrence rate within five years from the studies selected for local excision (LE: 12.8%) was nearly double that of radical excision (RAD: 5.0%). The five-year mean survival rate for both LE and RAD groups from the studies selected was 86%, which was equal for both groups. The main predictors of poor outcomes were older age and the presence of two or more comorbid conditions. There is a consensus amongst studies that LE is associated with inferior oncological outcomes such as postoperative complications and recurrence when compared to RAD. The higher local recurrence rates in LE are attributed to occult lymph node disease and inadequate adjunctive therapy due to suboptimal staging. There is no difference in the five-year survival rate when compared to RAD. A longer follow-up period is needed to determine whether the survival rates diverge after five years.

Clinical predictors of pathological good response in locally advanced rectal cancer

Purpose

The aim of this study was to identify the clinical predictors of pathological good response (PGR) after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) in locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) to clarify the indications for local excision.

Methods and materials

A total of 173 patients with LARC (cT3–4/N +) who were treated with nCRT followed by surgery were enrolled in our retrospective study. Patients were categorized into two groups according to the different tumor responses of surgical pathology. Stage ypT0–1N0 was defined as the group with PGR, and stage ypT2–4N0/ypTanyN + was the defined as the pathological poor response (PPR) group, and the potential predictors were compared.

Results

Of 173 patients, PGR was achieved in 57 patients (32.95%). The distance from the inferior margin of the tumor to the anal verge, cT classification, pretreatment carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) and the interval from the end of radiation to surgery were correlated with pathological response. In the multivariate analysis, the distance from anal verge < 5 cm (OR = 0.443, p = 0.019), pretreatment CEA < 5 ng/mL (OR = 0.412, p = 0.015) and the interval from the end of radiation to surgery ≥ 84 days (OR = 2.652, p = 0.005) were independent predictors of PGR.

Conclusions

The distance from the inferior margin of the tumor to the anal verge, pretreatment CEA and the interval from the end of radiation to surgery were significant predictors of PGR in LARC. A prospective study is needed to further validate these results in the future.

Limited surgery following neoadjuvant treatment among patients with localized rectal cancer; a population-based study

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the characteristics and outcomes of patients with localized rectal cancer treated with limited versus radical surgery following neoadjuvant treatment.

METHODS

Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database has been accessed and patients with localized rectal adenocarcinoma (M0) 2004-2015 who have received neoadjuvant radiation before having some sort of surgery were included. Multivariable Cox regression analysis was then used to assess the impact of the type of resection on overall survival and cancer-specific survival.

RESULTS

A total of 19162 individuals who have undergone radical surgery and 450 individuals who have undergone limited surgery were included. Using multivariable logistic regression analysis, the following factors were associated with a higher likelihood of radical surgery: younger age (OR for age ≥65 years versus 17-64 years: 0.430; 95% CI: 0.355-0.520) and clinically node-positive stage (OR: 2.442; 95% CI: 1.858-3.211). Within multivariable Cox regression analysis, limited surgery was associated with worse overall survival (HR: 1.276; 95% CI: 1.092-1.491) but no difference in cancer-specific survival (HR: 0.980; 95% CI: 0.728-1.318).

CONCLUSION

Among patients with localized rectal cancer treated with neoadjuvant radiation, there does not seem to be a difference in cancer-specific survival according to the type of surgery (limited versus radical surgery).

Early-rectal Cancer Treatment: A Decision-tree Making Based on Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Local excision (LE) has arisen as an alternative to total mesorectal excision for the treatment of early rectal cancer. Despite a decreased morbidity, there are still concerns about LE outcomes. This systematic-review and meta-analysis design is based on the "PICO" process, aiming to answer to three questions related to LE as primary treatment for early-rectal cancer, the optimal method for LE, and the potential role for completion treatment in high-risk histology tumors and outcomes of salvage surgery. The results revealed that reported overall survival (OS) and disease-specific survival (DSS) were 71%-91.7% and 80%-94% for LE, in contrast to 92.3%-94.3% and 94.4%-97% for radical surgery. Additional analysis of National Database studies revealed lower OS with LE (HR: 1.26; 95%CI, 1.09-1.45) and DSS (HR: 1.19; 95%CI, 1.01-1.41) after LE. Furthermore, patients receiving LE were significantly more prone develop local recurrence (RR: 3.44, 95%CI, 2.50-4.74). Analysis of available transanal surgical platforms was performed, finding no significant differences among them but reduced local recurrence compared to traditional transanal LE (OR:0.24;95%CI, 0.15-0.4). Finally, we found poor survival outcomes for patients undergoing salvage surgery, favoring completion treatment (chemoradiotherapy or surgery) when high-risk histology is present. In conclusion, LE could be considered adequate provided a full-thickness specimen can be achieved that the patient is informed about risk for potential requirement of completion treatment. Early-rectal cancer cases should be discussed in a multidisciplinary team, and patient's preferences must be considered in the decision-making process.

Impact of a Prior Nonpancreatic Malignancy on Survival Outcomes of Patients With Stage IV Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumor: A Population-Based and Propensity Score Matching Study

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the study was to investigate the impact of a previous nonpancreatic malignancy on the survival outcomes in patients with a stage IV pancreatic neuroendocrine tumor (PanNET).

METHODS

The Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database was reviewed, and patients diagnosed with a stage IV PanNET between 2004 and 2015 were selected. Patients were divided into 2 groups according to the presence or absence of a previous nonpancreatic malignancy. Clinicopathological characteristics and survival outcomes were compared.

RESULTS

A total of 1582 patients with stage IV PanNET were identified, of whom 116 (7.3%) had a prior malignancy. Prostate (33.62%), breast (17.24%), and gastrointestinal (12.07%) malignancies were the most common. Most prior malignancies (84.48%) were localized and regional. Patients with intervals of 36 months or less, 36 to 60 months, 60 to 120 months, and more than 120 months account for 25.86%, 14.66%, 31.03%, and 28.45% of all cases, respectively. Before and after propensity score matching, there was no significant difference detected regarding survival outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Stage IV PanNET patients with a history of a prior cancer had comparable survival outcomes with patients without such history. These patients could be candidates for clinical trials if otherwise appropriate, and aggressive and potentially curative therapies should be offered.

Development and clinical application of bispecific antibody in the treatment of colorectal cancer

INTRODUCTION

Treatment of colorectal cancer as one of the most commonly diagnosed and a frequent cause of cancer-related deaths is of great challenges in health-related issues.

AREAS COVERED

Immunotherapy is the fourth pillar of cancer treatment which provides more novel therapeutic options with expanding investigational potentials. One of the modalities in immunotherapy is the use of bispecific antibodies. Despite demonstrating many promising roles, it still needs more advanced studies to identify the actual pros and cons. In this review, the application of bispecific antibody in the treatment of colorectal cancer has been explained, based on preclinical and clinical studies. The literature search was conducted mainly through PubMed in June and September 2019.

EXPERT OPINION

Bispecific antibody is in its early stages in colorectal cancer treatment, requiring modern technologies in manufacturing, better biomarkers and more specific target antigens, more studies on individual genetic variations, and conducting later phase clinical trials and systematic reviews to achieve better survival benefits.

Locally Excised T1 Rectal Cancers: Need for Specialized Surveillance Protocols

BACKGROUND

Local excision of T1 rectal cancers helps avoid major surgery, but the frequency and pattern of recurrence may be different than for patients treated with total mesorectal excision.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to evaluate pattern, frequency, and means of detection of recurrence in a closely followed cohort of patients with locally excised T1 rectal cancer.

DESIGN

This study is a retrospective review.

SETTINGS

Patients treated by University of Minnesota-affiliated physicians, 1994 to 2014, were selected.

PATIENTS

Patients had pathologically confirmed T1 rectal cancer treated with local excision and had at least 3 months of follow-up.

INTERVENTIONS

Patients underwent local excision of T1 rectal cancer, followed by multimodality follow-up with physical examination, CEA, CT, endorectal ultrasound, and proctoscopy.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcomes measured were the presence of local recurrence and the means of detection of recurrence.

RESULTS

A total of 114 patients met the inclusion criteria. The local recurrence rate was 11.4%, and the rate of distant metastasis was 2.6%. Local recurrences occurred up to 7 years after local excision. Of the 14 patients with recurrence, 10 of the recurrences were found by ultrasound and/or proctoscopy rather than by traditional methods of surveillance such as CEA or imaging. Of these 10 patients, 4 had an apparent scar on proctoscopy, and ultrasound alone revealed findings concerning for recurrent malignancy. One had recurrent malignancy demonstrated on ultrasound, but no concurrent proctoscopy was performed.

LIMITATIONS

This was a retrospective review, and the study was conducted at an institution where endorectal ultrasound is readily available.

CONCLUSIONS

Locally excised T1 rectal cancers should have specific surveillance guidelines distinct from stage I cancers treated with total mesorectal excision. These guidelines should incorporate a method of local surveillance that should be extended beyond the traditional 5-year interval of surveillance. An ultrasound or MRI in addition to or instead of flexible sigmoidoscopy or proctoscopy should also be strongly considered. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/A979. CÁNCERES RECTALES T1 EXTIRPADOS LOCALMENTE: NECESIDAD DE PROTOCOLOS DE VIGILANCIA ESPECIALIZADOS: La escisión local de los cánceres de recto T1 ayuda a evitar una cirugía mayor, pero la frecuencia y el patrón de recurrencia pueden ser diferentes a los de los pacientes tratados con escisión mesorectal total.

OBJETIVO

Evaluar el patrón, la frecuencia y los medios de detección de recidiva en una cohorte de pacientes con cáncer de recto T1 extirpado localmente bajo un régimen de seguimiento especifico. DISEÑO:: Revisión retrospectiva.

AJUSTES

Pacientes tratados por hospitales afiliados a la Universidad de Minnesota, 1994-2014 PACIENTES:: Pacientes con cáncer de recto T1 confirmado patológicamente, tratados con escisión local y con al menos 3 meses de seguimiento.

INTERVENCIONES

Extirpación local del cáncer de recto T1, con un seguimiento multimodal incluyendo examen físico, antígeno carcinoembrionario (CEA), TC, ecografía endorrectal y proctoscopia.

PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO

Presencia de recurrencia local y medios de detección de recurrencia.

RESULTADOS

Un total de 114 pacientes cumplieron con los criterios de inclusión. La tasa de recurrencia local fue del 11,4% y la tasa de metástasis a distancia fue del 2,6%. Las recurrencias locales se presentaron hasta 7 años después de la escisión local. De los 14 pacientes con recurrencia, 10 de las recurrencias se detectaron por ultrasonido y / o proctoscopia en lugar de los métodos tradicionales de vigilancia, como CEA o imágenes. De estos diez pacientes, cuatro tenían una cicatriz aparente en la proctoscopia y el ultrasonido solo reveló hallazgos relacionados con tumores malignos recurrentes. En una ecografía se demostró malignidad recurrente, pero no se realizó proctoscopia concurrente.

LIMITACIONES

Revisión retrospectiva; estudio realizado en una institución donde se dispone fácilmente de ultrasonido endorrectal CONCLUSIONES:: Los cánceres de recto T1 extirpados localmente deben tener una vigilancia específica distinta de los cánceres en etapa I tratados con TME. El régimen de seguimiento deberá de extender más allá del intervalo tradicional de 5 años de vigilancia. También se debe considerar la posibilidad de realizar una ecografía o una resonancia magnética (IRM) además de la sigmoidoscopía flexible o la proctoscopía. Vea el Resumen del video en http://links.lww.com/DCR/A979.

Long-term oncological outcomes of local excision versus radical resection for early colorectal cancer in young patients without preoperative chemoradiotherapy: a population-based propensity matching study

The incidence and mortality of colorectal carcinoma are rising in young adults. This population-based propensity matching study aimed to compare long-term oncological outcomes of local excision with radical resection for early localized colorectal cancer (CRC) in young patients without preoperative chemoradiotherapy. Patients under 45 years old with T1 colon or rectal adenocarcinoma who underwent local excision or radical resection were included from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database between 1998 and 2014. Survival curves were plotted using the Kaplan-Meier method. Cancer-specific survival (CSS) was compared using adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) between local excision and radical resection. After propensity score matching procedure, total of 1719 patients were included in the analysis, among which 573 treated with local excision and 1146 treated with radical resection. The median follow-up was 80 months (interquartile range(IQR): 37-132), with 1074 patients followed for ≥5 years and 508 patients followed for ≥10 years. Five-year CSS of local excision versus radical resection was 93.4% versus 96.7% for colon cancer and 96.6% versus 98.4% for rectal cancer. Ten-year CSS of local excision versus radical resection was 91.4% versus 94.0% for colon cancer and 92.8% versus 96.7% for rectal cancer. On multivariable analysis, compared with radical resection, local excision was not associated with inferior CSS for colon (HR 1.74, 95% CI: 0.92-3.29, P = 0.090) and rectal cancer (HR 2.16, 95% CI: 0.99-4.71, P = 0.052). There is no evidence of differential long-term oncological outcomes between local excision and radical resection. These findings supported clinical application of local excision for early colon and rectal cancer in young adults.